Skip to main content

About your Search

20121128
20121206
STATION
MSNBCW 9
CSPAN2 4
CSPAN 2
CNNW 1
LANGUAGE
English 18
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)
. to quote admiral mike mullen again, the pentagon budget was doubled in the last decade. and we have lost the ability to prioritize. to make our decisions and to do tough analysis. we also need a review of our defense strategy to make sure that we are preparing for the threats and risks of the 21st century, not those of the past. the foundation has funded two efforts along these lines to help advance the best ideas of improving our strategies. earlier this year, we funded a project by the stimson center, which brought together 15 defense experts to examine our strategic defense priorities in some detail and how they should be reformed. today, we announced a new coalition for fiscal and national security. the coalition chaired by admiral mike mullen in regards to defense of both republican and democratic administrations, stretching back more than 30 years, as well as leaders to the congress including the very distinguished gentleman here today. all that served our nation, and they are joining together now to say very clearly that our leaders must find solutions for the long-term fiscal cha
troops. backed by the aclu, four women service members are suing the pentagon for barring them from direct combat duty. zoey is a captain in the u.s. marine corps reserves and plaintiff in the lawsuit, air yell la is a senior staff attorney for the aclu women rights project. thanks so much. captain bodell, you deployed twice to afghanistan and basically left the active duty marines corps because you were blocked from the combat duty. what is the difference, the most important difference, between being able to be in combat and not? >> well, to be clear, women are serving in combat and i was in charge of a team called the female gaugement team -- engagement team and i had 47 marines and they were in combat if that unit was attacked, they were attacked with them. so i do want to make clear women are in combat and we're asking that the policy be changed to reflect the reality of what's happening on the ground. >> i mean -- >> exactly. the point you're making is that in these wars, there's to front line, there's no rear guard. once you've deployed you are in combat, you are subject to al
states military. they've fought, died right alongside the guys. pentagon rules prehave not women from officially serving in certain combat roles. today a big move to change that. and the palestinian leader, yasser arafat, died under mysterious circumstances years ago. we've heard speculation all along that israel may have poisoned him. now scientists have opened his grave to try to figure out whether somebody did poison him. and as it turns out, it's probably too late. the details ahead on this tuesday fox report cool, you found it. wow. nice place. ye. [ chuckles ] the family thinks i'm out shipping these. smooth move. you used priority mail flat-rate boxes. if it fits, it ships for a low, flat rate. id for postage online and arranged a free pickup. and i'm gonna track them online, too. nice. between those boxes and thislace, i'm totally staying sane this year. do i smell snickerdoodles? maybe. [ timer dings gotta go. [ male announcer ] priority mail flat rate boxes. online pricing starts at $5.15. only from the postal service. he loves risk. but whether he's climbing everest, scuba
military. we have to maintain readiness. anybody who says we can't cut anything out of the pentagon has not spent the time i have in the pentagon. there's been a lot of money wasted through very wasteful practices, particularly in the space of contracting. if we don't get this fixed now, we'll be right back repeating the same mistakes the next time that we find ourselves putting men and women's lives at risk on behalf of our nation. >> you feel like the discussions that are happening right now around the defense bill and some of the things you have worked on, you feel like it's potentially ground to move forward? >> i do. and the main thing is to not go on to the next shiny object. we need to stay in this space, make sure we debate the issues fully, set policy clearly and then hold them accountable. hold their feet to the fire and make sure we don't go back to bad habits and some of decisions, people understand what the ground rules are. >> it's times like this you have to be focused on having the best debate. >> that's exactly right. >> congratulations on your win. >> thank you very mu
have no evidence that the iranian claims you cite are true. i'd refer you to the pentagon's comments this morning about the type of uav, but, again, no evidence that the claims are true. >> how do you view, though, the fact they have shot some drone -- >> again, we have no evidence to hear the claims are true. i'm not going to comment on something about which we have no evidence in its truthfulness. yes? >> jay, thanks. i want to go back to what the president asked in the interview with bloomberg. during the negotiations with speaker boehner, a year ago, he was willing to consider increasing the eligibility age for medicare recipients and slowing benefits for entitlements, and he said he was willing to look at anything that strengthens our system. can you clarify, are those prams that could strengthen the system, is that what he was signaling? >> i will say a couple things that build on and echo what the president said today and in the past. we put forward substantial and specific savings in entitlement programs. both health care entightmentments, and, you know, non-health care manda
at the pentagon before heading back to the baltimore region alternating working in private practice and working in the state's attorney general's office, while continuing to serve as an active duty u.s. army j.a.g. corps officer with occasional stints in the pentagon. in 1997, judge grimm was elected a magistrate judge by the judges of the u.s. district court for the district of maryland and in 2006 became the chief u.s. magistrate judge in baltimore. in 2009, chief justice john roberts appointed judge grimm to serve as a member of the advisory committee for the federal rules of civil procedure, and in 2010, he was designated as chair of the civil rules committee discovery subcommittee. i mention that because it's evident from the chief judge's appointment that judge grimm is a nationally recognized expert on cutting edge issues of law and technology. he has written numerous authoritative opinions, books and articles on the subject of evidence, civil procedure and trial advocacy. he also continues to inspire the next generation of lawyers by teaching classes at both of our law schools, and on s
for their own support for syria. joining me now is nbc's chief pentagon correspondent jim jim miklaszewski. a speech that really didn't have anything having to do with what syria, clearly there's intelligence on the ground that has u.s. officials concerned. >> reporter: that's right, chuck. all the latest intelligence indicates that the u.s., nato, and particularly the syrian people are really staring the worst case scenario directly in the face. just about the time rebel forces started to make significant advances in the capital da m damascus, u.s. officials tell nbc news that the assad regime informed its chemical weapons corps to get prepared. and just about that time, u.s. intelligence noticed a flurry of activity around several of the chemical weapons sites, an indication, perhaps, that the chemical corps is moving two precan cursor chemicals to the same locations to weaponize artillery shells and once you combine those precursor chemicals it creates that deadly nerve gas. now the question is, as president obama threatened, there will be consequences if assad regime does use chemical
, but the pentagon, the joint chiefs, a lot of republican defense hawks, a lot of the defense contractors say not only would the level of cuts in the automatic sequester portion that goes to defense be harmful to national security, but that it would be a huge hit on the economy because there's so many jobs involved. so my sense is people don't want to talk about that because it would raise a lot of alarms but in some ways is more serious than the tax cuts even though they don't all occur at once. it would sends us down a difficult path. it's already created a lot of uncertainty in the defense world. >> some of the more liberal opponents of the deal on the democratic left, would not mind seeing these defense cuts. >> just as they wouldn't mind in some cases on the left seeing the tax increase on everybody so that they can force a vote to lower the rates back only for those americans outside the top 2%, you're right. a lot of liberals would like to see that. this is why the president has leverage. he has some leverage off of his victory in the campaign, but he's got a lot of leverage off of the
for the last -- since anybody can remember as the party that wants to rein in government spend รงpentagon. austerity regiment is a republican idea. when it comes time to put the your money where the mouth is, republicans are unable to identify significant cuts other than play on the margins? it makes my central point which is the tea party movement, which are the inmates in control of the asylum and republican party right now is an intellectually bankrupt movement. there is time to show the cuts and they can't do it. >> can i very quickly -- >> that was a psychiatric reference there, martin. you didn't cut him off on that. in fairness -- >> i just want to quickly say, in 2002 dick cheney said deficits don't matter. when republicans crammed through the bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 through reconciliation, they wrote them to expire. they are the ones who made them expire and they did it because it was an accounting gimmick to hide the cost of the bush tax cuts just as they hid the cost of the bush wars, which were also done off the books. they don't care about deficits. they care about fla
to welcome minister barak to the pentagon. i would like to begin by taking a moment to pay tribute. he has made an announcement that he intends to retire from political life in israel. our friendship stretches back a number of decades to i think the beginning -- my time as member of congress and as a member of the clinton administration. we also worked closely when i was director of the cia and had a number of meetings in that capacity and certainly now as secretary defense. since i became secretary of defense, we have been in regular communication and have built a strong working relationship. i could not have more respect for he is brilliant, strategic mind. he has one of the best in the business. it stems from a warrior heart and his warrior experience. he has had a lifelong and to protecting the state of israel -- lifelong commitment to protecting the state of israel. a few people have such far- reaching and positive impacts on israeli security and prosperity. i have to say on that u.s.- isreali relationship, it is the strongest -- the relationship between the united states and israel i
and principlely those cuts in defense will be very, very onerous according to the pentagon and everybody else. do you think that this is a feint or what they need to do just because it takes a while to get these things in order? >> well, you know, i'll leave it to them to decide whether it's a feint but it's dangerous. the defense cuts are devastating, they shouldn't happen, and by the way, they'll be a domestic cuts of comparable quality. actually that's really the republican leverage in the debate, not the tax issue but the spending cuts if we dealt with the tax cuts for 98%, spending cuts would still be there, still have the leverage we need. but look, probably the white house is being prudent. but this is serious. there's a strong disagreement but in the end the two sides have been able to negotiate in the past, speaker boehner's very good negotiator, negotiating the extension of the bush tax cuts two years ago, budget deal in 2011, debt ceiling deal in august of 2011, all those things have led to prosperity or -- faster growth and less spending. i think we should continue to work with him. l
in the most remote location, could quickly put it on and put it to work. chris lawrence, cnn, the pentagon. >> wow. i want three of those puppies. >>> we'll be right back. if you think running a restaurant is hard, try running four. fortunately we've got ink. it gives us 5x the rewards on our internet, phone charges and cable, plus at office supply stores. rewards we put right back into our business. this is the only thing we've ever wanted to do and ink helps us do it. make your mark with ink from chase. at chevy's year-end event, we have 11 vehicles that offer an epa-estimated 30 mpg highway or better. yeah? hey. hey. where's your suit? oh, it's casual friday. oh. [ male announcer ] chevy's giving more. now get a 2013 malibu ls for around $199 per month, plus competitive lessees can get $1,000 toward the down payment for an even better deal. well that was uncalled for. folks who save hundreds of dollars switching to geico sure are happy. how happy, ronny? happier than gallagher at a farmers' market. get happy. get geico. chances are, you're not made of money, so don't overpay for motorcy
of rank. there's all sorts of money to be saved in the pentagon that will have no effect whatsoever on our defensive posture or our capability. >> but steve, i'm curious, though. what is the difference, in your opinion, between raising the top marginal rate and closing some loopholes? if you get $1.2 trillion in revenue, why does it matter so much more to the president that you do it by raising the top rate when the super wealthy, as we've described on the show, aren't going to be paying higher taxes? >> the issue is, joe, it's a question of whether it's going to be $800 billion or $1.2 trillion or somewhere in between. if the number ends up being $1.2 trillion, and we'll see where it comes out, it's hard to do it just with deductions. you end up limiting deductions so much that you cut into charities. you cut into state and local governments. you cut into a whole bunch of home mortgage. >> what about the buffett proposal? >> the buffett proposal is a great idea. the buffett proposal is a kind of no-brainer. >> how much does it raise? >> $160 billion over ten years. it's a piece of the puz
the sequester, that's good, less spending. i'm in favor of looking at the pentagon spending and reforming how you get it and get the same amount of dollars. look at the government spending. >> not a common republican position. >> more common than you think, but it's not common in the appropriations committee that does armed services. i talked to one of the key guys over there and said how can i help you reform the pentagon? there must have been >> i bet congressmen love getting that call, grover norquist, how can i help? >> i start meetings that way. want to make the government more efficient, make it cost less and we are everybody's friend on that subject. ralph nader and i were lobbying the bush administration back in 2001. >> what about the second cliff, the bush tax cuts? >> i think -- you get towards the end in a thing and if the republicans have played it right, they said look, push it out a month or two weeks so you should never actually go over these things, just as you do with continuing resolutions. say, look, give it a week, two months. >> the president is not going to extend. he k
in the past that it defies the pentagon and the size american debt that we're too big to fail. deadhorse lake bigger problem than us. i be interested when you're anything about policy do you look at that as a source of leverage or does it strain american options tremendous a? >> steve, very simply, the u.s. situation with respect to our deficit and debt is a national security liability. we need our senior leadership. we need a senior leadership to take it on. we have an opportunity to do so. we have a requirement to do so. at the foundation of national power is ultimately economic comment and in terms of global influence, in terms of the ability to support a military, the economic is foundation. and we have i think the united states, both an opportunity to require it to get our house in order, and i believe that our 100 senators and members of the house will step up on this and sufficient majority in the coming months. >> how do you look at your surplus of the u.s.? does that say we have america under our control? >> we are one of the closest allies of the united states. so of course our posi
the pentagon bio fuels program. the defense bill has always had bi-partisan support. this time, it passed unanimously 98 to zero. we will be right back. who watch our show to be able to come away armed with facts and the arguments to feel confident in their positions. i want them to have the data and i want them to have the passion. but it's also about telling them that you're put on this planet for something more! i want this show to have an impact beyond just informing. an impact that gets people to take action for themselves. as a human being that's really important. this is not just a spectator sport. [ music ] >> broadcasting across the nation on your radio and on current tv this is "the bill press show". >> president obama tells bloomberg news one more time, there will be no deal unless tax rates go up for the wealthiest of americans. what do you say? hello, everybody. and a great big wednesday morning to you. great to see you this morning. it is the full court press coming to you live from our nation's capitol here on washington d.c. keeping our eye on what's goi
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)